Viewing Uploading Image Problem
Uploading Image Problem
|
User: Les C. 11 years ago
|
|
|
Uploaded photos (JPEGs, PNGs) and all are softening considerably. No more than a couple of mbs at most. Suggestions? LC |
|
|
User: Paul-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
Can you explain in more detail what you mean by "softening". An example would also be helpful so I can better understand and help fix this issue.
------------------------------- Paul EverWeb Developer |
|
|
User: Les C. 11 years ago
|
|
|
-- Paul I have a graphic image that is 147 kb. It is sharp on a Retina screen. I insert it into EverWeb. It displays fine, i.e., it is clear and no changes have occurred. If I "Preview" the web page or upload it, the image loses its sharpness as if EverWeb over-compressed it. The same is happening with text on pages—the look of uploaded fonts are changing (I am not exporting the text as an image). I didn't experience this problem in v. 1.6x. I am running v. 1.7b9. |
|
|
User: Paul-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
Is your website uploaded somewhere so I can check it out online? Can you send me the exact url and specify which image you are having issues with.
------------------------------- Paul EverWeb Developer |
|
|
User: Les C. 11 years ago
|
|
|
-- Paul Send me an ftp or email address and I will send you a screenshot of the pre- and post-uploaded images. I can also include the image, if you like. LC |
|
|
User: Jeremy-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
Hi Les. You can actually send these screenshots and the image to our support department and we can take a look at it there; http://www.ragesw.com/support/ |
|
|
User: Paul-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
I really need to see your website published somewhere. It could be the set up is wrong within EverWeb. Also you can post images here by pressing the Advanced button. But again, I really need to see your website published online.
------------------------------- Paul EverWeb Developer |
|
|
User: Milo L. 11 years ago
|
|
|
I'm have the same issue. http://www.milosart.com/testsite/milos-art/index.html |
|
|
User: James G. 11 years ago
|
|
| I recently noticed this after putting up a test site. My main image looked fine on macbook pro 13 and ipad and mobile phone was fuzzy on nexus 7 became unreadable on landscape and unreadable on a mac 27 inch | |
|
User: Roddy 11 years ago
|
|
|
The general rule for inserting images into a web page is that you use the lowest possible file size to give a reasonable quality on the various devices that it will be viewed on. There's no use in using the same image for a website aimed at smart phone users and on one that will be viewed on a desktop. This "general" rule goes out of the window when the image is considered artwork. An image of a painting needs to have the quality bumped up if it is required to show the detail. The more detail required - the higher the resolution of the image and the greater the file size. In Milo L's case, the images have been dragged onto the design canvas and are being displayed at a low resolution. For example, the image of the Blues Man has file size of 49KB and is displayed at 263 x 501px. If the same image were imported at 526 x 1002px and then displayed at 263 x 501px using an <img> tag or a widget, it would show a lot more detail. Artists and photographers have to use their common sense and judgement when deciding on the compromise between quality and file size. If you really need to use a large file to get the quality, use less images per page. Extra web pages don't cost much - do they? If you only put one or two images on a page, visitors are more likely to look at them. Large, good quality image files on a web page also get artists worried about people ripping the off. This is another reason for reducing the quality by the right amount to showcase the product in a favorable light without giving it away for free. The stock answer is to watermark the image but, if I was an artist, I don't suppose I would want an ugly © notice stuck on my product. The same applies to slideshows. The more images - the lower the quality. Better to have 6 to 12 reasonable quality images that visitors will actually look at than dozens of them that either load too slow or the quality has been reduced too much to get the page to download in under 3 seconds. ------------------------------- Roddy Website: http://everwebwidgets.com Contact: http://everwebwidgets.com/ewWidgets-home/contact.html NOTE: I am an EverWeb user and NOT affiliated with EverWeb! Any opinions expressed in this forum are my own. |
|
|
User: Milo L. 11 years ago
|
|
| Thanks for the reply Roddy. In my case, I'm just throwing test images into the test site and they coming out blurrier. But what I can't find answers on are what does Everweb do to the image and what are the image standards? I drag a photo directly from my existing website or desktop onto Everweb and it shrinks it. Why? All these photo options like scale to fit..scale to fill..stretch...original size...tile. What are their best uses? Should we be adding "fresh" images and not ones that were already compressed in jpgs? Here are my 2 websites I will be rebuilding with Everweb. www.milosart.com and www.milosmetal.com | |
|
User: Christopher 11 years ago
|
|
|
If you want to maintain control over your images, do your resizing yourself and only import the finished files. Don't let EW do the compressing for you. For desktop retina, you obviously need 2 files. So if you want your final image to be 600x800 for example, prepare two images: one that is 1200x1600 with the file extension @2x (image@2x.jpg), the other that is 600x800 (image.jpg). I try not to have file sizes larger than 250 KB and I can usually achieve that with JPG compression set to 5. The less compression, the bigger the size, the longer the download... so compromise accordingly, as Roddy said. If you do anything in EW like adding shadow or reflection or borders, EW will then convert your image to a PNG. (Am I right, guys?). So obviously, if you don't want it to be compressed twice, either avoid adding 'effects' or do them yourselves before uploading your final image. For graphics and logos, you're probably better to use png instead of jpg. You can then reduce the file size with minimal loss in quality with this awesome app. It's free. Just my 2 cents... Last edit 11 years ago ------------------------------- rMBP 15", 2.6 Ghz, 16 GB RAM, OS X 10.11.6, with 27" Thunderbolt Cinema Display www.cleetche.com |
|
|
User: James G. 11 years ago
|
|
| Is there a max image size that EW doesn't compress? Like files under 249kb or something? | |
|
User: Milo L. 11 years ago
|
|
| I used Dreamweaver for years. It's a complicated program but my perfect images in always appeared perfect online. If Everweb compresses, I need to know how much. An image 1200x1600 pixels wide shrunk to a smaller size looks blurry. If so then why? Why use drag-n-drop if you can't resize the image. | |
|
User: Christopher 11 years ago
|
|
|
I don't think EW compresses anything unless you select Convert to Low Resolution when the warning page comes up alerting you that the image file is huuuuuge! But Paul or Jeremy can confirm.
------------------------------- rMBP 15", 2.6 Ghz, 16 GB RAM, OS X 10.11.6, with 27" Thunderbolt Cinema Display www.cleetche.com |
|
| Post Reply |
| You must login or signup to post. |